The DOJ's AP Investigation: "For those interested in pushing back against partisan attacks..."

[Auburn85 438]

http://mediamattersa...rs/201305140001

The AP revealed yesterday that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months of reporter and editor phone records from 2012, likely as part of an investigation into leaks around a counterterrorist operation in the Arabian Peninsula. While it's early in this story and we don't have all the facts, this case raises important questions about the balance between a free press and effective national security. For those interested in pushing back against partisan attacks while the rest of us grapple with the larger questions, here is language to guide you.

KEY ISSUES TO RAISE

• If the press compromised active counter-terror operations for a story that only tipped off the terrorists, that sounds like it should be investigated.
  
• It was not acceptable when the Bush Administration exposed Valerie Plame working undercover to stop terrorists from attacking us. It is not acceptable when anonymous sources do it either.
  
• Is this story about a government source blowing the whistle on government misbehavior, or about a source gratuitously exposing ongoing counter-terrorism operations?
  
• Did Republicans in Congress who are now exploiting the situation to score political points oppose the media shield law that likely would have protected the Associated Press in this situation?
  
• How should the Justice Department strike the balance between respecting our free press and investigating damaging leaks that jeopardize counter-terrorism operations?
  

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW

• For background on an informational firewall between the White House and the Department of Justice with respect to pending investigations, see this 2007 statement by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse.
  
• Click here for background on the status of the proposed Free Flow of Information Act, or a federal shield law for journalists. Also see "Republicans In Congress Killed A Media Shield Law That Would Have Protected The Associated Press."
  
• The Supreme Court case you need to know is Smith v. Maryland. (Click here for the wonkblog.com reference.)
  
• For a flashback to the Valerie Plame affair, which involved the Bush Administration revealing classified information about Valerie Plame's CIA employment with the media and led to the exposure and endangerment of her overseas sources, click here for a rundown of the key playersand here for a timeline.
  
• The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act is designed to protect federal workers reporting government wrongdoing. For more information on this legislation, which was signed into law last fall, click here. (Note the distinction between exposing classified information in violation of federal law and reporting government wrongdoing and corruption.)
  
• For Department of Justice agency policy on news media subpoenas, including subpoenas of telephone records, see the United States Attorneys' Manual and the Code of Federal Regulations.
  

We develop messaging by aggregating, analyzing and distilling polling, tested messaging, and expert recommendations, and monitoring the media to identify what is and isn't working. See here for some of the experts and organizations we draw on.

[AURaptor 1,137]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

[Auburn85 438]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

The purpose of this, along with any other issues that might shed negative light on Obama or Democrats is to make the argument a wash.

Obama can allow massive debt to pile up because when Bush piled up debt, while Obama said Bush's debt was unamerican or unpatriotic or whatever.

Obama can rail against the Patriot Act, and then on his watch they can secretly gather phone records of the AP. And if any Republican or anyone decides to call out Obama, we have to review if the outrage was just as equal under Bush with the Patriot Act.

Obviously, the point is to never get to a solution but just to play ping pong.

[cptau 169]

the cabinet departments blame each other.

the cabinet secretaries say they don't know, talk to their deputies and under secretaries

the white house blames State, CIA, DoJ, and DoD

Obama says I did not know about it, or he blames Bush.

It would be great comedy, except we are suffering with the affects of it....

[autigeremt 7,260]

It's all part of the game. Kelp 'em busy over here while we do things over there.

Before you know it the 2014 midterms are here and the hope is all of the bad news dies down.

[homersapien 12,329]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

Ya know, when you start ranting about "this nation of liars" it may be time to challenge your own beliefs.

The facts concerning this incident are relatively well known. Start with Wikipedia.

[cptau 169]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

Ya know, when you start ranting about "this nation of liars" it may be time to challenge your own beliefs.

The facts concerning this incident are relatively well known. Start with Wikipedia.

SInce Armitaqe admitted in 2003 to being Novak's source of the "leak" about Plame. why didn't Special Counsel Fitzgerald prosecute him, but told him to keep quiet about his role for 2 years? If it was a violation of the law, Fitzgerald failed to prosecute the person that actually outed Plame.

http://www.washingto...6090701781.html

[AURaptor 1,137]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

Ya know, when you start ranting about "this nation of liars" it may be time to challenge your own beliefs.

The facts concerning this incident are relatively well known. Start with Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is not the arbiter of truth, genius. So sorry, but I don't do revisionist history. I know you LOVE buying into the water cooler mentality, and buy into everything that the MSM force fed you on such matters, but the REALITY is, Bush didn't " out " Ms Plame. Not even close.

[homersapien 12,329]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

Ya know, when you start ranting about "this nation of liars" it may be time to challenge your own beliefs.

The facts concerning this incident are relatively well known. Start with Wikipedia.

SInce Armitaqe admitted in 2003 to being Novak's source of the "leak" about Plame. why didn't Special Counsel Fitzgerald prosecute him, but told him to keep quiet about his role for 2 years? If it was a violation of the law, Fitzgerald failed to prosecute the person that actually outed Plame.

http://www.washingto...6090701781.html

I don't know. What's your point?

[homersapien 12,329]

The Bush admin did NOT expose Val Plame. She was NOT working ' under cover'.

I swear to ... I'm freaking sick and tired of this nation of liars.

Ya know, when you start ranting about "this nation of liars" it may be time to challenge your own beliefs.

The facts concerning this incident are relatively well known. Start with Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is not the arbiter of truth, genius. So sorry, but I don't do revisionist history. I know you LOVE buying into the water cooler mentality, and buy into everything that the MSM force fed you on such matters, but the REALITY is, Bush didn't " out " Ms Plame. Not even close.

Bush didn't. The Bush administration did.

And I never suggested that Wikipedia was the "arbiter of truth".

I said it would be a good place for you to start researching the matter, genius.